Likely targets for Corbyn Defence cuts?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the road to PM...
win leadership contest (better than 50/50 at the mo)
unite labour party (maybe, after the night of the long knives)
gain credibility with the non hard left electorate (never been done in the last fifty years or more - think Foot & Kinnock)
Survive as labour leader through several major political events (scottish elections 2016, EC referendum 2017, maybe (prob not) another scottish ind ref.
Lead a credible, effective, well-funded election campaign (neither Foot nor Kinnock could do it, and in Kinnock's case with half the electorate literally hating the tory party post thatcher)
Convince the swing voters (ditto)
Win the election (which not only means doing all of the above, but also relies on the tories screwing up large with middle Britain).
Odds of all of the above 10 to 1 ??. Worth a punt if you are gambling man; not worth staying awake at night worrying about it IMO.
win leadership contest (better than 50/50 at the mo)
unite labour party (maybe, after the night of the long knives)
gain credibility with the non hard left electorate (never been done in the last fifty years or more - think Foot & Kinnock)
Survive as labour leader through several major political events (scottish elections 2016, EC referendum 2017, maybe (prob not) another scottish ind ref.
Lead a credible, effective, well-funded election campaign (neither Foot nor Kinnock could do it, and in Kinnock's case with half the electorate literally hating the tory party post thatcher)
Convince the swing voters (ditto)
Win the election (which not only means doing all of the above, but also relies on the tories screwing up large with middle Britain).
Odds of all of the above 10 to 1 ??. Worth a punt if you are gambling man; not worth staying awake at night worrying about it IMO.
Perhaps a more pertinent question is will there be anything left for him to cut, except from the nuclear deterrent. 85,000 full time troops, 6 or 7 FJ squadrons, 28 surface ships doesn't leave much scope for downsizing.
It is true that many of the people supporting Mr. Corbyn have never known what it was like in the 1970s; indeed, many of them have known little other than the Major-Blair-Brown-Cameron years which all roll into one. A lot of them are sick to the back teeth of austerity, and would not want to see the likes of the other candidates running the party.
So I think that he is likely to be elected party leader and, as has been pointed out, with the backing of the unions behind him many MPs will think twice before attempting a coup. Many of those MPs have been elected because of union backing as well, which they will be reminded of. I also think that a left wing Labour party will be much more attractive to many of those who have left in the New Labour years because of the move towards the centre-left, and they can command a lot of support as well. And as for those saying they would not serve in a Corbyn cabinet... crap. Of course they will.
PMQs could be interesting if Corbyn wins the leadership, as he is no Milliband and is less likely to be intimidated by Cameron. I think there will be less bluster and less opportunity for Cameron to score cheap points.
As for a Corbyn government... well, I wouldn't go that far yet, but I don't think it will be such a walkover for the Conservatives as everyone is saying. In any case, who knows what the political landscape will be in 2020. Cameron will not be fighting the election as party leader, and we could have Osborne as PM instead (dear Lord, really?).
But the question is, what will the armed forces look like under a Corbyn government?
Well, we already know that Trident is out, and there will be no expeditionary forces and no NATO commitments. Probably no UN commitments either. So as far as the Royal Navy is concerned, no carriers, no SSBNs and probably no Type 23 replacement. Type 45s and Astutes will stay, but reduced in numbers, with an increased emphasis on home waters. Bulwark and Albion might stay, Ocean out. No F-35 for the FAA, and a big reduction in helicopter numbers. Marines to stay, but vastly reduced in numbers and SBS absorbed into SAS.
The Army will lose a lot of capability, and will become essentially a home defence force comprising of mechanised infantry with artillery. Complete withdrawal from Germany, Falklands and probably all overseas bases, no attack helicopters, no tanks and far less of everything else. SAS shrunk in size with
As for the RAF, no offensive capabilities, so no F-35s, and Typhoon reduced to a couple of squadrons at most (30-40 aircraft). No need for large transports, but Voyagers retained due to contractual obligations, and SHF reduced to proportional size for the army. E-3s out, RC-135s out, Sentinels probably out, no drones of any kind at all. Red Arrows disbanded, BBMF to private operators. RAF Regiment disbanded/taken over by the army, Fylingdales closed.
That is extreme, but with no NATO or UN roles and no expeditionary forces, what else do you need for home defence only?
So I think that he is likely to be elected party leader and, as has been pointed out, with the backing of the unions behind him many MPs will think twice before attempting a coup. Many of those MPs have been elected because of union backing as well, which they will be reminded of. I also think that a left wing Labour party will be much more attractive to many of those who have left in the New Labour years because of the move towards the centre-left, and they can command a lot of support as well. And as for those saying they would not serve in a Corbyn cabinet... crap. Of course they will.
PMQs could be interesting if Corbyn wins the leadership, as he is no Milliband and is less likely to be intimidated by Cameron. I think there will be less bluster and less opportunity for Cameron to score cheap points.
As for a Corbyn government... well, I wouldn't go that far yet, but I don't think it will be such a walkover for the Conservatives as everyone is saying. In any case, who knows what the political landscape will be in 2020. Cameron will not be fighting the election as party leader, and we could have Osborne as PM instead (dear Lord, really?).
But the question is, what will the armed forces look like under a Corbyn government?
Well, we already know that Trident is out, and there will be no expeditionary forces and no NATO commitments. Probably no UN commitments either. So as far as the Royal Navy is concerned, no carriers, no SSBNs and probably no Type 23 replacement. Type 45s and Astutes will stay, but reduced in numbers, with an increased emphasis on home waters. Bulwark and Albion might stay, Ocean out. No F-35 for the FAA, and a big reduction in helicopter numbers. Marines to stay, but vastly reduced in numbers and SBS absorbed into SAS.
The Army will lose a lot of capability, and will become essentially a home defence force comprising of mechanised infantry with artillery. Complete withdrawal from Germany, Falklands and probably all overseas bases, no attack helicopters, no tanks and far less of everything else. SAS shrunk in size with
As for the RAF, no offensive capabilities, so no F-35s, and Typhoon reduced to a couple of squadrons at most (30-40 aircraft). No need for large transports, but Voyagers retained due to contractual obligations, and SHF reduced to proportional size for the army. E-3s out, RC-135s out, Sentinels probably out, no drones of any kind at all. Red Arrows disbanded, BBMF to private operators. RAF Regiment disbanded/taken over by the army, Fylingdales closed.
That is extreme, but with no NATO or UN roles and no expeditionary forces, what else do you need for home defence only?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: the earth
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well look on the positive side. Those of us that are left following the mass cull by comrade Corbyn could form a Union and then go on strike for better pay and conditions. A return to AFPS 75, no night flying (unless I get a special night flying bonus - like the Tube drivers), 3 day weeks and more leave.
If my CO makes me do something I don't like I can complain to my Union rep and refuse to carry out said instruction if I believe it breeches my contract. Late night call outs as Orderly Officer or OOD would be subject to a 'late call out bonus'. I will have at least 24hrs off following any such duty regardless of call outs. I will turn up to work 30mins before the brief (not before 0800 or after 1700 or see Late call out bonus), and if my jet is not ready within +/- 20 mins of the published take off time, any new take off time must be agreed with me first. I reserve the right to refuse any amended take off time without reason if it falls outside of the +/- 20 min window.
Any weekend duty or dets that span weekends ( and public holidays), even if not 'in work', if away from my home station shall be considered 'at work' and therefore subject to special overtime pay rates. All postings must be agreed with me at least 6 months in advance and I reserve the right to refuse said posting without reason.
I would like to nominate myself as the first General Secretary!! (With appropriate pay rise of course)
If my CO makes me do something I don't like I can complain to my Union rep and refuse to carry out said instruction if I believe it breeches my contract. Late night call outs as Orderly Officer or OOD would be subject to a 'late call out bonus'. I will have at least 24hrs off following any such duty regardless of call outs. I will turn up to work 30mins before the brief (not before 0800 or after 1700 or see Late call out bonus), and if my jet is not ready within +/- 20 mins of the published take off time, any new take off time must be agreed with me first. I reserve the right to refuse any amended take off time without reason if it falls outside of the +/- 20 min window.
Any weekend duty or dets that span weekends ( and public holidays), even if not 'in work', if away from my home station shall be considered 'at work' and therefore subject to special overtime pay rates. All postings must be agreed with me at least 6 months in advance and I reserve the right to refuse said posting without reason.
I would like to nominate myself as the first General Secretary!! (With appropriate pay rise of course)
Last edited by AutoBit; 5th Sep 2015 at 14:38.
Ok, here goes....
First of all, I'm not politically right of Attila the Hun, nor is this an attack on M-t-M, but when he says sick to the back teeth of austerity I'm afraid one of the things I think is, what exactly is the truth about this "austerity" everyone complains about?
Austerity is an easy word to throw at both this, and the previous, government, by the likes of Corbyn and Sturgeon, etc to score points. But what is the reality behind the phrase?
There is no doubt the UK government has a substantial debt, in terms of % of GDP, that can't just be ignored, or more money printed to get around. When you're paying more in interest to service your debt than your Defence Budget, and your credit rating drops making borrowing more expensive, you're on the slippery slope downwards. Any national debt above 40% of GDP is generally considered unhealthy and unsustainable in the long term - the UK's is currently 89%.
United Kingdom Government Debt to GDP | 1980-2015 | Data | Chart | Calendar
So the government is trying to reduce its spending, which is recognised by most sane people. Even Gordon Brown was criticized as taking the public for fools with his talk of "TORY CUTS" vs Labour "Difficult decisions" in the 2010 election campaign.
Did the Tory/Liberal government make drastic cuts? Well actually not as much as they wanted to, as the annual budget deficit is still above the initial targets.
How have these "savage" government spending cuts effected the man in the street?
Over 40% of households in the UK have Sky TV.
93% of adults in the UK have a mobile phone. Facts & figures | Ofcom
Unemployment levels are back down to those last seen in 2006.
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl...oyment+rate+uk
Walking down the average high street, how many Costa Coffees and Starbucks have closed down due to lack of customers?
Then there's the "growth of food banks" due to government austerity argument. Well first of all, even the wealthiest countries in the world have food banks:
Food banks remain even in oil-rich economy | The Times
There's also the argument, which most people are afraid to make as they will be vilified for doing so, of "..if you build it they will come....".
Has the UK government cut pensions, reduced the NHS budget? Yes, there have been attempts to reduce the welfare budget, but ultimately a country pays what it can afford. The reality is that not every country in the EU even pays some of the benefits we have taken for granted in this country for many years.
Compare so called "austerity measures" in the UK with what is actually happening in Greece, Portugal, etc. Now that really is AUSTERITY.
As for the public being "fed up" with austerity measures, ("it's been years now"!) , it's easy and quick to get into debt, but it takes a long time to get out of it. The only quick way out of debts is to make much more DRASTIC CUTS - how about no NHS funding at all for a couple of years, that would save a significant amount, but would the public have stood for that?
So, behind the opposition/opportunist politician's throw away line attacking the government about "austerity", is it really a case that some southern European countries actually have "austerity", but the UK merely has "austerity light"?
Standing by for incoming!!
First of all, I'm not politically right of Attila the Hun, nor is this an attack on M-t-M, but when he says sick to the back teeth of austerity I'm afraid one of the things I think is, what exactly is the truth about this "austerity" everyone complains about?
Austerity is an easy word to throw at both this, and the previous, government, by the likes of Corbyn and Sturgeon, etc to score points. But what is the reality behind the phrase?
There is no doubt the UK government has a substantial debt, in terms of % of GDP, that can't just be ignored, or more money printed to get around. When you're paying more in interest to service your debt than your Defence Budget, and your credit rating drops making borrowing more expensive, you're on the slippery slope downwards. Any national debt above 40% of GDP is generally considered unhealthy and unsustainable in the long term - the UK's is currently 89%.
United Kingdom Government Debt to GDP | 1980-2015 | Data | Chart | Calendar
So the government is trying to reduce its spending, which is recognised by most sane people. Even Gordon Brown was criticized as taking the public for fools with his talk of "TORY CUTS" vs Labour "Difficult decisions" in the 2010 election campaign.
Did the Tory/Liberal government make drastic cuts? Well actually not as much as they wanted to, as the annual budget deficit is still above the initial targets.
How have these "savage" government spending cuts effected the man in the street?
Over 40% of households in the UK have Sky TV.
93% of adults in the UK have a mobile phone. Facts & figures | Ofcom
Unemployment levels are back down to those last seen in 2006.
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl...oyment+rate+uk
Walking down the average high street, how many Costa Coffees and Starbucks have closed down due to lack of customers?
Then there's the "growth of food banks" due to government austerity argument. Well first of all, even the wealthiest countries in the world have food banks:
Food banks remain even in oil-rich economy | The Times
There's also the argument, which most people are afraid to make as they will be vilified for doing so, of "..if you build it they will come....".
Has the UK government cut pensions, reduced the NHS budget? Yes, there have been attempts to reduce the welfare budget, but ultimately a country pays what it can afford. The reality is that not every country in the EU even pays some of the benefits we have taken for granted in this country for many years.
Compare so called "austerity measures" in the UK with what is actually happening in Greece, Portugal, etc. Now that really is AUSTERITY.
As for the public being "fed up" with austerity measures, ("it's been years now"!) , it's easy and quick to get into debt, but it takes a long time to get out of it. The only quick way out of debts is to make much more DRASTIC CUTS - how about no NHS funding at all for a couple of years, that would save a significant amount, but would the public have stood for that?
So, behind the opposition/opportunist politician's throw away line attacking the government about "austerity", is it really a case that some southern European countries actually have "austerity", but the UK merely has "austerity light"?
Standing by for incoming!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where do you start?
Thousands have died soon after being found ?fit to work? by the DWP?s benefit tests - UK Politics - UK - The Independent
The first big lie, unemployment figures or rather those allowed to actually claim benefit more like it; totally manipulated by the "civil" service under ministerial directive.
Disabled, including children being sanctioned, whist the fat cats and those sycophants who believe they serve the system, crow on about how things are better. Better for whom?
Defence cut to the bone with vanity, eyewateringly expensive projects still allowed to run.
Foreign aid whilst we have people dying on the streets.
I'm sure there are more examples that will show just how fortunate we are today... "austerity light" you can thank the Lib Dems for that, because the tories would have had the same done to the UK population
BTW as for corbyn...just another deluded politician.
The first big lie, unemployment figures or rather those allowed to actually claim benefit more like it; totally manipulated by the "civil" service under ministerial directive.
Disabled, including children being sanctioned, whist the fat cats and those sycophants who believe they serve the system, crow on about how things are better. Better for whom?
Defence cut to the bone with vanity, eyewateringly expensive projects still allowed to run.
Foreign aid whilst we have people dying on the streets.
I'm sure there are more examples that will show just how fortunate we are today... "austerity light" you can thank the Lib Dems for that, because the tories would have had the same done to the UK population
BTW as for corbyn...just another deluded politician.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sick of austerity.."? Come on, who isn't; would anyone rather be poor than rich? The most bonkers aspect of the Corbynites is their idea that simply stating Austerity is over will make the money tree start sprouting. That way lies Greece; a post-Corbyn financial collapse will harm our defence way more than the inventory of equipment cuts
In all seriousness, if he became Prime Minister, and that is increasingly likely never trust the British electorate to always take every facet of a would be leader into consideration, and if he was to escape to influence of every advisor civil servant military and intelligence chief, then I imagine we will lose everything, Nuclear deterrent for certain, all FJ units, both carriers de-commissioned, and no realistic combat role for any element of H.M. Forces.
What I imagine would be left, would be air transport, rotars, vessels like HMS Ocean I imagine will survive to be engaged in emergency aid and rescue missions with a much smaller Army, again geared toward helping out folk deluged by floods or buried under Volcanic ash or earthquake rubble. He strikes me as politically principled enough to do something foolish like deploy same to help victims fleeing IS with no weapons, not as much as truncheon with a woolly cover, that's when it'll become really interesting. How his being in No 10 would impact upon Putin's subsequent moves on the chess board would also be quite interesting, not to mention the reaction to how all unfolds by whoever is in the White House at the time!?
Now I've made this post without checking those prior, I imagine I've fallen approximately into line with received wisdom.
FB
What I imagine would be left, would be air transport, rotars, vessels like HMS Ocean I imagine will survive to be engaged in emergency aid and rescue missions with a much smaller Army, again geared toward helping out folk deluged by floods or buried under Volcanic ash or earthquake rubble. He strikes me as politically principled enough to do something foolish like deploy same to help victims fleeing IS with no weapons, not as much as truncheon with a woolly cover, that's when it'll become really interesting. How his being in No 10 would impact upon Putin's subsequent moves on the chess board would also be quite interesting, not to mention the reaction to how all unfolds by whoever is in the White House at the time!?
Now I've made this post without checking those prior, I imagine I've fallen approximately into line with received wisdom.
FB
TOFO,
Back in May the idea of someone of Mr Corbyn's reputation and political stripe becoming the leader of anything other than some lefty student union was felt as likely as the possibility he could become Prime Minister, as we're now certain that he'll be leading the Labour Party after the 12th September then it is entirely possible, in this country today, although far from certain, that he could be Prime Minister in 2020. All it will take is his continued appeal as an honest man and a bit of luck explaining away some of his hippier comments in the past and an unpopular Tory Government in the run up and he stands a fair chance of becoming Prime minister. The public who vote in 2020 won't be anything like those who voted in 1983. Further, if a Corbyn Government is so much nonsense, then I can't understand that the question asked on this thread has any point to it.
FB
Back in May the idea of someone of Mr Corbyn's reputation and political stripe becoming the leader of anything other than some lefty student union was felt as likely as the possibility he could become Prime Minister, as we're now certain that he'll be leading the Labour Party after the 12th September then it is entirely possible, in this country today, although far from certain, that he could be Prime Minister in 2020. All it will take is his continued appeal as an honest man and a bit of luck explaining away some of his hippier comments in the past and an unpopular Tory Government in the run up and he stands a fair chance of becoming Prime minister. The public who vote in 2020 won't be anything like those who voted in 1983. Further, if a Corbyn Government is so much nonsense, then I can't understand that the question asked on this thread has any point to it.
FB
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All it will take is his continued appeal as an honest man and a bit of luck explaining away some of his hippier comments in the past and an unpopular Tory Government in the run up and he stands a fair chance of becoming Prime minister.
Anything is possible because weird stuff happens - saying it is "likely" or a "fair chance", is ignoring history and the political structure of the UK and its electorate.
Corbyn is popular amongst the radical left - that is small minority of the UK electorate and even if that popularity spread into a broader appeal (which it won't) he would still be hampered by the reality of the first past the post electoral system, which counts constituencies, not people. Exactly how many seats do you think any hard left party will ever win in rural England?
TOFO,
You are of course quite correct in your description of how British elections are fought and won. Up until a year or so ago, the idea that any one political party, let alone a radical left wing one could garner sufficient votes in a first past the post election as to take 56 instead of their usual rational allocation of three or four or five, was utterly ludicrous. But it has happened in Scotland, to a ridiculous degree! 56 out of 59 seats now held by the SNP! One of them, to a 20 year old student! Taken from a senior moderate Labour MP.
And now, a party we presume had had enough of the political wilderness, Labour, is surging forth on a tide of euphoria for Jeremy Corbyn! I'll say this, any witless young tory who thought it clever or funny or a dig at the lefties by handing over their three sovs just so they could vote for Jeremy because they though they'd F up Labour's chances at the 2020 election could just very well have contributed to the very last thing they'd wish for, anything can happen, including a well orchestrated campaign to get Corbyn into number 10, there were women in England who honestly were frustrated because they couldn't vote for Nichola! TOFO, it could happen, nothing is sacred.
FB
You are of course quite correct in your description of how British elections are fought and won. Up until a year or so ago, the idea that any one political party, let alone a radical left wing one could garner sufficient votes in a first past the post election as to take 56 instead of their usual rational allocation of three or four or five, was utterly ludicrous. But it has happened in Scotland, to a ridiculous degree! 56 out of 59 seats now held by the SNP! One of them, to a 20 year old student! Taken from a senior moderate Labour MP.
And now, a party we presume had had enough of the political wilderness, Labour, is surging forth on a tide of euphoria for Jeremy Corbyn! I'll say this, any witless young tory who thought it clever or funny or a dig at the lefties by handing over their three sovs just so they could vote for Jeremy because they though they'd F up Labour's chances at the 2020 election could just very well have contributed to the very last thing they'd wish for, anything can happen, including a well orchestrated campaign to get Corbyn into number 10, there were women in England who honestly were frustrated because they couldn't vote for Nichola! TOFO, it could happen, nothing is sacred.
FB
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thousands have died soon after being found ?fit to work? by the DWP?s benefit tests - UK Politics - UK - The Independent
The first big lie, unemployment figures or rather those allowed to actually claim benefit more like it; totally manipulated by the "civil" service under ministerial directive.
Disabled, including children being sanctioned, whist the fat cats and those sycophants who believe they serve the system, crow on about how things are better. Better for whom?
Defence cut to the bone with vanity, eyewateringly expensive projects still allowed to run.
Foreign aid whilst we have people dying on the streets.
I'm sure there are more examples that will show just how fortunate we are today... "austerity light" you can thank the Lib Dems for that, because the tories would have had the same done to the UK population
BTW as for corbyn...just another deluded politician.
The first big lie, unemployment figures or rather those allowed to actually claim benefit more like it; totally manipulated by the "civil" service under ministerial directive.
Disabled, including children being sanctioned, whist the fat cats and those sycophants who believe they serve the system, crow on about how things are better. Better for whom?
Defence cut to the bone with vanity, eyewateringly expensive projects still allowed to run.
Foreign aid whilst we have people dying on the streets.
I'm sure there are more examples that will show just how fortunate we are today... "austerity light" you can thank the Lib Dems for that, because the tories would have had the same done to the UK population
BTW as for corbyn...just another deluded politician.
Well said Biggus! I for one am well right of Genghis Khan and believe the word austerity should be banned! It is meaningless when applied to our financial circumstances! The phrase that really bugs me is " a fair and just society". It is trotted out day after day and really means nothing except to the fluffies who believe it might actually happen!
First of all, I'm not politically right of Attila the Hun, nor is this an attack on M-t-M, but when he says sick to the back teeth of austerity I'm afraid one of the things I think is, what exactly is the truth about this "austerity" everyone complains about?
Well said, Biggus. People may eventually learn the meaning of the word 'consequences'.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, which is why I feel the services value to the argument is so undervalued, it gives employment to pretty much every walk of life, a career ( such as it is) and could take you a few steps up the class ladder should you choose, therefore giving your children a step up. I speak from experience, its not all good, but it ain't bad either. Remembering that the vast cohort for the services is in fact under 25.....for now.
Originally Posted by tnnmorris
You need to listen to the radio 4 show 'More or less: behind the stats' available as a podcast, before you start quoting stats on people dying after losing their benefits. As the presenter says, plenty of people die after eating their breakfast...
Also unsurprisingly, the authorities were unlikely to record the number of people dying after their benefits were stopped. Why would they and how could they?